[whatwg] Some <video> questions
lists07 at wiltgen.net
Tue Jan 29 09:29:07 PST 2008
>> So for Safari on both Macintosh and Windows, is Apple's intent
>> that <video> will only work for formats supported by QuickTime?
>> And given that little internet content targets QuickTime, who
>> exactly will be using the <video> tag?
> Even though video codecs aren't pluggable on the browser level in
> Safari, they are pluggable on the QuickTime level.
Point well taken...in theory, formats could create Mac/Windows import
components, media handlers, movie controllers, etc. to plug their format
In practice, users aren't aware of that QuickTime can be extended like this,
and the very few that are use them primarily to view and convert files in
format X (vs. as a way to deploy contnt in format X).
The <video> element would solve a real problem if it worked with plug-ins.
If that's not the requirement, I don't currently understand who would use it
or how it could become mainstream.
For example: YouTube embeds SWF files. Shouldn't that be a <video> element
from a semantic POV? If so, that seems to imply a requirement for the
<video> element to be extendable with plug-ins.
More information about the whatwg